Early Church Fathers
222 §12, note 2.
223 These two Letters are both in Socr. ii. 37. And the latter is in Theod. H. E. ii. 15. p. 878. in a different version from the Latin original.
224 The corrections were made before he could obtain the essay carefully and gratefully used, but his text is defective, especially and text of Sievers (Zeitsch. Hist. Theol. 1868), where he now from the accidental omission of one of the key-clauses of the finds them nearly all anticipated. Sievers' discussion has been whole (§17).
1 Eusebius of Vercellae, exiled (Hist. Ar. 33; Ap. Fug. 4) after Milan 355. See D.C.B. ii. 374 (93).
2 Lucifer of Calaris: cf. Letters 50, 51, below, and Hist. Ar. 33; Apol. Fug. 4.
3 The following are all the details that can be collected with regard to the bishops named in the text. Asterius (Hist. Ar. 18 note); Kymatius of Paltus in Syria Prima (Apol. Fug. 3; Hist. Ar. 5); Anatolius of Euboea (not in D.C.B.); Gaius (Apol. Fug. 7; Hist. Ar. 72, D.C.B. i. 387, No. 19??); Agathus, Hist. Ar. 72 (not in D.C.B.); Ammonius (see Hist. Ar. 72 sub.-fin.; Ap. Fug. 7, Letter 49. 7, and infr. Appendix, note 1 as to names in D.C B.); Agathodaemon (Hist. Ar. ibid.); Dracontius and Adelphius (Letters 49, 60); Hermaeon (Hermion in §10) unknown, unless the `Hermes' of Hist. Ar. 72; Marcus (2), (cf. D.C.B iii. 825 (7) for works ascribed to one or the other); Paphnutius, (Hist. Ar. 72; D. C B. iv. 184 (4)); Zoilus of Andropolis (Harduin, &c., suo jure, identify him with the bishop of the Syrian Larissa, who signs at Antioch in 363, Conc. i. 742; D.C.B. iv. 1220); Andreas, George, Lucius, Macarius, Menas, and Theodore, are unknown and not in D.C.B. The names all recur (excepting those of George, Lucius, Macarius), in §10, where the sees are specified.
4 Eph. iv. 5.
5 See Ps. cxxxiii. 1.
6 2 Cor. vi. 16, and Lev. xxvi. 12.
7 Ps. cxxxii. 14.
8 'En rh palaia, cf. Theodt. H.E. i. 3: possibly the old Town is meant, viz. the main part of Antioch on the left bank of the Orontes, so called in distinction from the `New' town of Seleucu Callinicus which occupied the Island in the river. The `Old' Church, or Church of the Apostles, was situated in the Old Town, and was at present occupied by the orthodox party of Meletius. The old orthodox party of Paulinus had only one small church in the New Town, granted for their use out of respect for Paulinus by the Arian Bishop Euzoius (Socr. H.E. iii. 9.).
9 The draft is given by Theodt. H.E. ii. 8; it insists vehemently on the `One Hypostasis.'
11 anousiou, anupostatou, the words are rendered `unessential' and `not subsisting' in another connection, supr. p. 434, &c.
12 Phil. ii. 7, &c.
13 Rom. viii. 29.
14 John viii. 58.
15 Ib. xi. 34.
16 Mark viii. 22, &c.
17 1 Pet. iv. 1.
18 Hab. ii. 15.
19 John x. 16.
20 Of Laodicea, the later heresiarch.
21 i.e. Vercellae, in `Cisalpine' Gaul, or Lombardy.
22 In Marmarica or `Libya Siccior' near the Ras el Harzeit.
23 Capital of the Sebennytic nome, near Handahur.
24 A town and custom-house near Andropolis, between Alxa. and the Canopic arm of the Nile.
25 Chief town of a nome in the Delta.
27 West of Alxa. toward the Libyan dessert, and not far from Zygra in Marmarica.
28 A very important town near the head of the Tanite arm. See Amm. Marc. xxii. 16. 6, who calls it one of the four largest cities in Egypt proper.
29 i.e. Andropolis (above, note 11).
30 West of Alxa. toward the Libyan dessert, and not far from Zygra in Marmarica.
31 See Prolegg. ch. ii. §3 (2) ad fin. This is remarkable as the first Eastern condemnation of Photinus by name from the Nicene side. He had been condemned at Sirmium in 347, and under pressure from the East apparently at Milan in 345 and 347, as well as in the Councils of Antioch in 344, and Sirmium in 351 (supr. pp. 463, 464). On the document of Paulinus, see Epiph. Hoer. lxxvii. 20, 21, also Dr. Bright's note.
32 Bishop of Antaradus on the Syrian coast (D.C.B. i 410 (3)); see de Fuga, 3, and Hist. Ar. 5. note 6a.
33 The corrections were made before he could obtain the essay carefully and gratefully used, but his text is defective, especially and text of Sievers (Zeitsch. Hist. Theol. 1868), where he now from the accidental omission of one of the key-clauses of the finds them nearly all anticipated. Sievers' discussion has been whole (§17).